GOP Candidates Against SOPA & PIPA

Finally, something nearly all of us seem to agree with. Though Rick (don't Google me) Santorum hedged a bit.

Wikipedia and Others to Shut Down for 24 Hours on January 18

In this image, logos of other companies were used to
illustrate the ABC stories. Would that be a violation,
or fair use? What about here?

Don't be surprised if you try to go to your favorite website and find it unusable on Wednesday. Some of them, notably Wikipedia, will be protesting a couple of intrusive "anti-piracy" bills in the House and Senate. In the worst case, if the bills were enacted into law, blogs like this one would be in danger of being shut down. Anything that could be considered someone else's intellectual property could be a violation, and it looks like corporations would be the arbiters. Sounds sort of like a corporatocracy or something, doesn't it? I don't like it, and I don't really care if it's left, right or bipartisan. And the big question: if site owners are responsible for content posted by others, how fast would Facebook and Twitter be out of business?

[Excerpt]


Wikipedia Blackout: Websites Wikipedia, Reddit, Others Go Dark Wednesday to Protest SOPA, PIPA

Do not try to look up "Internet Censorship" or "SOPA" or "PIPA" on Wikipedia, the giant online encyclopedia, on Wednesday. SOPA and PIPA are two bills in Congress meant to stop the illegal copying and sharing of movies and music on the Internet, but major Internet companies say the bills would put them in the impossible position of policing the online world. . .

Read more (with video) at: ABC News

New "Six Strike" Internet Rules for Media Pirates

Image from source, Digital Trends

I, along with many people, dabbled in media piracy many years ago. Napster was the big thing, and it didn't seem like stealing. I mean, the public service announcements would say, "you wouldn't steal a car, would you?" No, but if I could burn a copy. . . Of course, I didn't sell anything. The closest I came to distribution was to make the occasional party CD when going to a friend's house for a barbecue or something. And the sound levels and transitions between tracks were always wonky.

But Napster died, and so did my fledgling piracy career. Nowadays, all of the music I have is legal, though I've ripped every song from my CDs onto my computer to be able to put it on my phone, my iPod, and MP3 CDs for my car. I don't know if that counts or not.  In any event, I never progressed to bit torrents, or downloading movies or TV shows from illegitimate sources. Why would I? I've got the full OnDemand thingy on my cable, Netflix, and two bookshelves full of DVDs. Add that to YouTube, Hulu, HBOGo, and all of the other things available via the internet and my Blu-ray player, and I'm on video overload.

But you can't stop kids (and kid like adults) from dabbling in the margins. It's sexy to be bad. But now, the internet providers are on to them, and they've got the backing of the media industries and the government. Which worries me a little. I've got to think there are going to be "false positives." And this means the service providers have to be watching what you're looking at. ALL the time. Ever watch X-tube? Now they'll know. And how do you know if everything you're watching is legit? I see some problems with this.

[Excerpt]

Consumers who download illegal music or movies may soon lose Internet speed if they don't pay attention to new warnings from their Internet providers.

In a move supported by movie studios, record labels and the Obama administration, Internet providers have banded together to form a universal policy that imposes penalties on illegal downloads. The system allows for six strikes on an account with warning levels. The process starts with emails that require acknowledgement from the account holder. If the warnings are completely ignored, the final strikes result in decreasing Internet speed and eventually a block on all Web browsing. The system also offers a dispute process for anyone who disagrees with the warnings at the cost of a $35 filing fee. . .

Read more at: Digital Trends

San Diego GOP Chairman a Pirate? AARRGGH!

Photo from source, Raw Story

Most Americans are probably--knowingly or unknowingly--pirates of a sort. Somewhere along the way we've had a bootleg record, had a nephew install Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing on the computer for free, downloaded a song or a video. . . It's very, very common. But most of us haven't even entered the realm of the guy in this case. I'd say it's a fair bet that this guy ends up in the next Top 10 Conservative Idiots over on Democratic Underground.

[Excerpt]

San Diego GOP chairman co-founded international piracy ring

Any job applicant knows that background checks are routine – especially for jobs involving authority or oversight of money. So why didn’t the San Diego Republican Party do a simple Google search before naming Tony Krvaric as its chairman?

Online research reveals that Krvaric is the co-founder of Fairlight, a band of software crackers which later evolved into an international video and software piracy group that law enforcement authorities say is among the world’s largest such crime rings. . .

Read more at: Raw Story and more Here

Video Piracy: Is it Like Stealing a Car?

Here's the latest video clip from Commercials I Hate, which has a terrific (and funny) analysis of the issues involved in downloading copyrighted materials. The issue is a little less cut-and-dry from the "you wouldn't steal a car" argument. And it got me to thinking about just how much I myself have paid for various versions of the same movies; VHS, LaserDisc, DVD. . .

It's over $150 for The Rocky Horror Picture Show alone! And that doesn't count two LPs, two cassette tapes, the CD, and a box set DVD! Oh, and the sequel, Shock Treatment on LP, CD, VHS and DVD. I think if you put that all together, you get somewhere north of $400! Check it out:

ATT and Others Set to Filter the Internet?

In a classic case of closing the barn doors after the horses get out, media companies are frantically trying to keep their products in the form that they want them at the price they want us to pay. I understand this, honestly.

I, like most people, am totally against piracy as it pertains to movies and music on a big scale. I'll go out on a limb, and say that people who illegally obtain media, and distribute it for sale are bad. OK? I don't even like it when people download movies on those sharing sites. There's something distasteful about that to me.

The line is fuzzier when it comes to ripping CDs, copying them to your iPod, or burning a CD for your mom. And if you're only using music or video that you've already paid for on a different device, well, I don't see anything wrong with that.

So while going after the big dudes makes total sense to me, it sounds in this story like they're trying to go after the little guy. And creating roadblocks and hassles to getting legitimate media. It sounds bad.

[Excerpt]

AT&T and Other I.S.P.’s May Be Getting Ready to Filter

For the last 15 years, Internet service providers have acted - to use an old cliche - as wide-open information super-highways, letting data flow uninterrupted and unimpeded between users and the Internet.

But I.S.P.’s may be about to embrace a new metaphor: traffic cop.

At a small panel discussion about digital piracy at NBC’s booth on the Consumer Electronics Show floor, representatives from NBC, Microsoft, several digital filtering companies and the telecom giant AT&T said the time was right to start filtering for copyrighted content at the network level. . .

Read more at: New York Times